Fraser Speirs Cocoa and Photos

Spending other people’s money

I’ve always thought Bono was largely full of it. Today I am, irrevocably and forever, completely convinced of the fact. Bono has made a second career out of, in effect, telling other people (governments) how they should spend money which was acquired under coercion (taxation) from third parties (taxpayers). He calls it “aid”, but it means the same thing.

Yet, today, U2’s manager proves that globalised celebrity socialism only goes so far. Apparently, the line in the sand at which the transfer of capital from one group to another is firmly drawn is just before U2’s intellectual capital is transferred to people who download their music without paying.

U2’s manager proposed that ISPs be made to monitor and disconnect people who share files.

Is downloading U2’s music wrong because the people doing it are not dirt poor? One of the soft-celeb-left arguments in favour of aid is that “we have so much and they have nothing, so we should give them some money”. I don’t necessarily decry that, but why won’t the members of U2 - who undoubtedly have a very, very, very large pile of cash each - give those of us who have (relatively speaking) nothing, a slice of the action?

I don’t particularly condone piracy. However, given that Bono has made a second career out of advocating the involuntary transfer of capital from one group to another, it’s more than a bit rich to hear his manager whining about these ultra-rich rock stars not making enough money.

Fraser - Thank you for showing me that not all Europeans are redistribution socialists. I’d given up hope.

I think Bono could fund the aid himself given his net worth. We don’t need a rich celebrity telling the less fortunate where to put their dollars. Take notice to all the other celebrity that follow in his footsteps. Combine all their worth and they could save Africa themselves. Wouldn’t that be the press they are really after?

Regarding the ISP’s, look what Metallica did to themselves with Napster. I think this will only solidify U2’s downfall further. I can’t imagine ISP’s buying into it anyway. Who’s going to fund that project? Certainly not Bono!

You do realise that Bono and his manager are two different people right? There’s nothing in that Telegraph article (despite the photo of Bono) that indicates that the manager was talking for anyone but himself.

jon wight does kinda have a point. maybe the manager was speaking on his own behalf, if so, Bono should step up and put the kibosh on this guy’s statement.

question for Ted: you are aware that your comment is kinda offensive, right?

@Fraser, once again it’s “do as I say, not as I do” elitism coming to the fore…

@Ted, there’s a *lot* more people on this side of the pond who know where wealth comes from than you might think, but I can give you some leeway for thinking the way you do - the BBC, Grauniad and their leftist fellow travellers do have such shrill voices after all. However, you made the cardinal sin of assuming that everyone over here is ‘European’. tut tut. I’m English and proud of it. ps - I didn’t think your comment offensive.

@Jon, @Ed - perhaps Bono will say something himself. But it’s hard to disagree with the sentiment expressed, that ‘they’ want us to do something they’re not willing to do themselves (U2 shifted from Ireland to Amsterdam 2 years ago when Ireland changed its tax laws).

I don’t have a problem with the wealth people create - I just get rather pig-sick of ‘celebs’, be they rock stars, celebrity chefs, UN parasites or ex-politicians, telling me how I should live my life when they emphatically don’t do the same thing themselves.

Replying here to tweets because 140 char limit sucks!

@frasier Naive or not, I just dont think you are applying guilt by association here. There’s nothing in that article that says this is anything beyond one person’s opinion. Until you here otherwise from the band themselves you shouldn’t really smear them with the same brush. There’s a very good chance the manager is going off on one on his own without any approval (tacit or otherwise) from the band.

Personally Bono annoys the crap out of me. But it seems to me you’re really just using this as chance to bash the guy. Bash the guy as much as you like (he deserves it) but this is a flimsy reason to do so.

Doh. “I just dont think” == “I just think”. Also “hear”.

I just don’t preview enough

I need the Safari Typomatic 5000 plugin.

@Ed: I don’t agree that Ted’s comment is at all offensive. Don’t drop the “offensive” word without explaining why you find his point so. It’s not at all obvious to me why you would think it so offensive. Without justification, “offensive” is just another vague word deployed to have a chilling effect on open debate - just like “unhelpful”, “inappropriate”, “unpatriotic” or “unAmerican”.

@Jon: I’ll gladly eat humble pie and post a retraction as and when U2 fire this guy. Until then, he is an agent employed to work on their behalf.

@Jon: I’m more inclined to Fraser’s point here than yours. Ask yourself: Would Paul McGuiness get the platform to make this point were he not U2’s manager? Would anyone care if they didn’t think Bono agreed with him? If it reflects badly on Bono, he ought to have known it would be taken as read Bono agreed with him.

@Ed: My comment wasn’t meant to be offensive, and I’m sorry you might have taken it that way. Perhaps if you clarify why you find it offensive, I can address it specifically.

@Tony: I’m sure, here in America, we get a very stilted view of the political makeup of England and the other European countries from the press. I’m aware that not everyone in the UK is part of the pro-socialist mentality (and perhaps Fraser is pro socialist, I don’t really know for sure), just as here in America, not everybody is a cowboy (a common picture painted of us by the international press). It’s just nice to hear someone (whom I respect and admire, btw) saying the same things that I would say regarding the same topic. As an American outsider, it’s interesting to hear an individuals views on capitalism, government, taxation, etc. Especially when it is at odds with the picture the press paints.

Fraser is right - McGuinness is an employee of U2, and in many situations, their mouthpiece. So any opinions espoused by him on the topics of music and finances can and should be construed as at least supportee by U2 as a whole. If they weren’t, I’d expect to hear a retort from Bono/Edge/Larry/Adam (ok, maybe Adam just doesn’t give a flying f*** about anything) saying his statements are not reflective of their own. I know if an employee of mine was shooting his mouth off about my business, and his words were somewhat controversial, I’d either publicly support him or rebuke him.

Sorry, but I always thought that I pay taxes so that the people I elected do what I want them to do with that money. You know, building streets all alone sort of doesn’t make any sense. If you do live in a democracy it’s not like you have no way of influencing what your government does with your money. Some may even have elected people that are in favour of “aid”. Sounds crazy, I know.

Lobbyism, which is in effect what Bono does, is nothing I oppose because this mechanism also gives me a way of telling politicians in between elections what I would like them to do. Even though I don’t particularly like Bono I don’t fundamentally disagree with what he does in the same way in that I don’t disagree fundamentally with what Lobbyists of the oil industry do. They have the right to do so. They are entitled to their opinion, and they are entitled to tell their opinion to everyone including the government. It is often even useful to give them a seat at the table.

What you are saying in this piece is in effect: I don’t think Bono should be allowed to tell the government his opinion because he seems to be a hypocrite. No freedom of speech for Bono! What would make much more sense would be something like: Bono is a hypocrite. Plus I disagree with Bono’s demands because of the following reasons … Additionally I think that Lobbyist’s (and not just Bono’s) influence should be restrained because …

That would be a sound and logical argument.

@michael:

“What you are saying in this piece is in effect: I don’t think Bono should be allowed to tell the government his opinion because he seems to be a hypocrite. No freedom of speech for Bono!”

I’m not sure how you draw the conclusion that I’m arguing that Bono shouldn’t be allowed to give his opinion? Few people in the world have such unrestricted freedom of speech as he does.

What I am saying is that he should ether (a) stop demanding that governments take our money and spend it on his pet projects overseas or (b) stop whining when people take his assets and use them as they will.